Messages from the Shareholders
Here you will find the responses I have received in reaction to my letters. I have not identified the senders and left out any personal infornation that might be sensitive or enable identification. Some of the excerpts will be from letters sent to the Chairman and copied to me. If you want to add comments please do so but not direct criticisms of other individual letters please. I hope this collection will be of assistance to current Trustees and future candidates. I feel they have been operating in a vacuum with maximum input from the Executives and no channel for members views. The Council used to be elected by Single Transferable Vote (STV) but, a few years ago, that was changed to block X voting by First Past The Post on the pretext that there was a very low turnout for Council elections and a simpler method might improve turnout. This was done without asking members why they did not vote and without asking the Electoral Reform Society for advice. I discussed it later with the Company Secretary, who admitted that turnout had not increased after the change. In fact, if my memory is correct, I think he told me it had reduced! I had always voted before but I could see no point in voting by an undemocratic method so I stopped voting. The abandonment of STV was probably the first step in reducing the influence of members. Reintroducing STV for Council members is a change I would like to see to make Council more representative of members. I urge you to add it to your list of reforms. Posted 3/11 by A Wikia contributor'' '' " Your letter dated 1st Aug arrived yesterday and it was like a breath of fresh air! I read it with a growing sense of gratitude and relief that there is someone else who has comprehensively reflected my own sense of growing disappointment and despair at the developments within what now seems to be a self serving 'corporate' culture that has hi-jacked the hitherto trustworthy consumer organisation. Well Done! You can certainly count on my support for your campaign to reign in the excesses, improves governance and restore the hitherto rigorous, trustworthy and effective product testing capability. As a subscriber to Which magazine since 1972 and a member since about 1995, I started to noticed a decline in rigour and objectivity in test reports around 2000-2001 when the magazine started to be jazzed up to look like some Haymarket "What Car" type monthly with personality photos appearing of authors. I distinctly remember a review of the Chrysler Cruiser car had a totally subjective comment like "it really turned the heads of passers by" ... Reply 12/8/2014 uploaded October 7 by Dieseltaylor "Thanks for your letter. I appreciate the time you have taken to set out your position clearly. Regarding pay, I agree entirely with you based on the facts you have set out - except, perhaps, for the assumption that everyone who works for a charity should in some way be immune to the pay issues that affect all other companies and employees. Of course, it would be interesting to hear what Which? say in response, but I would listen to this with a half-sceptical ear because of course any organisation is going to try and justify the actions they have (corporately) taken. Regarding testing, I tend also to agree with you. I noticed, when researching printers earlier this year, the extreme disconnect between the Which reviews and some purchasers' comments - almost to the point of rendering the reviews worthless. ..... 27/8 uploaded October 7 by Dieseltaylor'' I have some sympathy with your views and with your resolutions. Were they put they would have my vote not least to increase transparency and accountability. However I cannot commit to be anything other than being an inactive supporter with one vote, albeit for 50 years as a member. ... 27/8 uploaded October 7 by Dieseltaylor Having now got myself sorted out after returning from holiday I have had a better look at your letter. I fully support your views and would appreciate the remaining information that you told me about when we spoke on Sunday. 27/8 uploaded October 7 by Dieseltaylor'' Thank you for your letter of 8th August 2014. I have long been dissatisfied with the Consumers' Association and it is only because I'm a 'founder member' of Gardening from Which? and therefore pay a reduced rate that I haven't actually got round to cancelling my membership! ........PS Would you mind being named as proxy to vote (as you see fit) on my behalf at the AGM? 14/8 uploaded October 7 by Dieseltaylor 87.112.xxx.xx '' I urge you and others not to appoint Patrick Walker as your proxy just in case he is prevented from attending the AGM. It would be better to appoint the "Chair of the meeting" because, even if the Board's Chair is prevented from attending, there will always be someone who will be Chair of the meeting. Don't worry about how the Chair will vote on your behalf. Your proxy, whoever it is, must by law vote as you instruct so all you have to do is put your instructions on the proxy form. '' Posted 3/11 by A Wikia contributor'' '' Thank you for your letter - I must apologise for the delay in replying but I have been away on holiday. I, too, have been noticing the increases in pay over the last few years for not only the 4 main executives but also some of the next levels and have considered them to be rather ridiculous. What I was not aware of was the additional potential for such huge bonuses which are totally unjustified. I have not been following the user reviews that you mention and so cannot comment but obviously there is something that is not quite right. The point about Shareholder Resolutions is very valid – ‘Which’ could easily afford to write to shareholders to circulate proposed resolutions, why should the shareholders have to pay? In any case nearly everybody is on email and such things could be circulated at virtually no cost to anybody – perhaps this is something the Trustees should be actively considering and implementing. ..... 23/8 uploaded October 7 by Dieseltaylor Following our telephone conversation earlier this afternoon, I am attaching a scanned copy of the covering letter from Peter Vicary-Smith which accompanied your letter of 1 August. I am pleased that you have taken the trouble to raise various matters; whilst I cannot offer much time, I will be interested to be kept in touch with any developments. ..... 12/8 uploaded October 7 by Dieseltaylor'' "I agree with the thrust of all of your proposed resolutions. 1. I am not aware that Which? is acharity in the conventional sense; it seems that it has charitable status for tax reasons. Therefore it is difficult to see how an appropriate bonus system can be devised. I much prefer bonus systems that address important, specific objectives of the organisation and are geared in a way which limits them to not more than a moderate fraction of basic salary. 2. I also am concerned about the quality and perspicacity of tesing regimes. For example, a "best buy" radio unit I purchased had no long wave capability so I couldn't listen to Test Match Special. The omission was not mentioned. Could you not have included a resolution requiring the editor to publish concurrently or subsequently the test results of other testing organisations where these differ materially from those of Which? Tests.2 Reply 11/8 uploaded October 7 by Dieseltaylor